> On Jun 6, 2018, at 10:06 AM, Karl Rupp <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> yes, I support Patrick's idea of actively encouraging such simple pull
> requests. Particularly when it comes to documentation, it would be very handy
> to also add a link to the manual pages on the top right. For example,
> http://www.mcs.anl.gov/petsc/petsc-current/docs/manualpages/Mat/MatSetValue.html
> currently states "Report Typos and Errors". We could add another line, e.g.
> "Fix Typos and Errors via Bitbucket" pointing to the respective source file
> (maybe even the source line can be pointed to).
Why isn't this in an on-line pull request?
>
> Best regards,
> Karli
>
>
>
> On 06/05/2018 07:02 PM, Patrick Sanan wrote:
>> After Karl's nice talk on contributing to PETSc, I was reminded of a similar
>> talk that I saw at the Julia conference. The title was also something like
>> "Contributing is easy!" but used an even more extreme example of making your
>> first contribution. It was (as Barry encouraged) a small documentation
>> change, and they demonstrated how to do this via the GitHub web interface.
>> This could be a great way to lower the "activation energy" for these kinds
>> of tiny, trivially-reviewable changes.
>> The practical steps with Bitbucket are approximately :
>> * go to the PETSc Bitbucket site
>> * navigate to the source file you want to change
>> * "edit"
>> * make sure you are at "master" (I had to select this from the
>> pull-down, otherwise "edit" was greyed out and and gives a hint on
>> mouseover)
>> * make your small, innocuous edit
>> * "commit"
>> * select "create a pull request" if needbe, and fill out comments /
>> reviewers as usual.
>> I believe that if you don't have write access, you can still do this and it
>> will create a fork for you automatically.
>> Here's a test:
>> https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/pull-requests/975/docs-manual-makefile-fix-typo-in-error/diff
>> Thoughts? Should this be actively encouraged?
